In response to David DeSimone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Let's flip the question around a bit: why would you _want_ the TCP > > stack to accept frames larger than the stated MTU? > > If I receive a 64K frame and the TCP checksum checks out, and the > sequence numbers match, and it passes my firewall state, why NOT receive > it? It is obviously valid, even if I cannot understand how my interface > could have received it. The packet is here, so do something useful with > it.
But it's not here yet. The problem is that it doesn't pass a basic sanity check at the media layer, so it would be dropped before it ever starts seeing checks at the TCP or IP layer. > I agree with others that MTU means "limit what I transmit". It does not > mean "limit what someone else can transmit to me." Interesting viewpoint. I disagree with it, but I can't quote any standard or otherwise to support my view. You didn't either. Does anyone know of a publicised, authoritative standard that would clear this up? -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 412-422-3463x4023 _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
